From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!enea!sommar
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: The danger of comparing languages
Message-ID: <3470@enea.se>
Date: 8 Jun 88 21:04:04 GMT
Organization: ENEA DATA AB, Sweden
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Mike Linnig (linnig@skvax1.csc.ti.COM) writes:
>My favorite example of this is the Pascal pointer type.  Most
>folks would translate them into an Ada access type.   I've worked
>with one Ada compiler that automatically created an access collection
>(heap) when a new access type was declared.  Heaven forbid you 
>should declare an access type in a frequently called procedure.  This
>doesn't mean that you cannot use access types, it just means you need
>to declare them once (say in a package).

Oh, for God's sake, no! Such regards should be avoided except in
extreme emergency. Ada gives you the chance to clearly express
what you are doing and to do things general and reuseable. Don't 
obsucre the code by doing unnatural things just because your
compiler behaves in a certain way. The compiler behaviour you 
describe sounds very inapproiate and should reported as a 
deficiency.
-- 
Erland Sommarskog           
ENEA Data, Stockholm        
sommar@enea.UUCP            
Mail your NO votes for rec.music.rock to: jfc%Athena.mit.edu@mit-eddie.UUCP